Father of the Year: Ted Nugent!

[Celeste]

anyway, I'm such a soft-hearted person, I'd probably let the fuck see the kid anyway...what I previously mentioned is just what I believe to be fair...I'd feel too sorry for the asshole to not let him play with the kid

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I haven't really been keeping track of this thread, but I've got to put my foot down. If you're saying you're going to let Ted Nugent come and play with Rhett Jr., you've got another thing coming.

[G.Love]

Mankie,
 
 You know what pisses me off is the fact that the man really has no decision in the entire process after conception.  Think about it:
 
 1)The woman can go have an abortion without the father's consent - what if the dad is willing to keep the kid and raise it on his own?  He doesn't get the choice.
 
 2)The woman can decide to keep the kid, against the father's wishes and then use have the father  pay child support. Once again he doesn't get the choice.
 
 The court systems have demasculated the modern day male!  Don't get me wrong I am all for having the father involved with the child even though he may not be involved with the child's mother; the lack of a strong paternal role model is a major crises in the urban landscape, which is why the cycle of young males having kids and not being part of the kid's life continues.

[vansmack]

Originally posted by Groundskeeper's Willy:
  Mankie,
 
 You know what pisses me off is the fact that the man really has no decision in the entire process after conception.  

Thank god this is a friday, otherwise this post is on the verge of becoming really intense.

[mankie]

Originally posted by Groundskeeper's Willy:
  Mankie,
 
 You know what pisses me off is the fact that the man really has no decision in the entire process after conception.  Think about it:
 
 1)The woman can go have an abortion without the father's consent - what if the dad is willing to keep the kid and raise it on his own?  He doesn't get the choice.
 
 2)The woman can decide to keep the kid, against the father's wishes and then use have the father  pay child support. Once again he doesn't get the choice.
 
 The court systems have demasculated the modern day male!  Don't get me wrong I am all for having the father involved with the child even though he may not be involved with the child's mother; the lack of a strong paternal role model is a major crises in the urban landscape, which is why the cycle of young males having kids and not being part of the kid's life continues.

Did you notice how Rhett and Celeste's child suddenly became HER child???
 
 That's my whle point...the women automatically assume it's their kid when the realationship breaks down.

[ggw]

Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  I haven't really been keeping track of this thread, but I've got to put my foot down. If you're saying you're going to let Ted Nugent come and play with Rhett Jr., you've got another thing coming.

Sounds like she is more concerned that Rhett Sr. might want to "come and play" with The Nuge.

[mankie]

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
  anyway, I'm such a soft-hearted person, I'd probably let the fuck see the kid anyway...what I previously mentioned is just what I believe to be fair...I'd feel too sorry for the asshole to not let him play with the kid

Hmmmm, so now you've taken 'ownership' of the child...it's very humble of you to allow Rhett to SEE HIS OWN FUCKING CHILD!
   :mad:

[Celeste]

Originally posted by keithstg:
 If people have to keep their commitments, why would you forgive infidelities? [/QB]

Because sexual urges are different from plotting and getting emotionally involved, and, because I wouldn't scrap my whole family structure just because a person was human and had a failing. If they decide, however, that they did not want to honor their commitment to the life we've built together as a whole, ie. work on the marriage, stay in the home as a father and husband, then, I don't see what is owed that individual. I would not be deciding to end his relationship with the children, HE would be deciding. You can't have it both ways (unless your bisexual and you disclose ahead of time)

[Celeste]

Originally posted by Groundskeeper's Willy:
  The court systems have demasculated the modern day male!  Don't get me wrong I am all for having the father involved with the child even though he may not be involved with the child's mother; the lack of a strong paternal role model is a major crises in the urban landscape, which is why the cycle of young males having kids and not being part of the kid's life continues.

men often "demasculate" themselves with their childish, pussy behavior

[Celeste]

Originally posted by mankie:
   

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
  anyway, I'm such a soft-hearted person, I'd probably let the fuck see the kid anyway...what I previously mentioned is just what I believe to be fair...I'd feel too sorry for the asshole to not let him play with the kid

Hmmmm, so now you've taken 'ownership' of the child...it's very humble of you to allow Rhett to SEE HIS OWN FUCKING CHILD!
    :mad:  [/b]

it's so not about Rhett...I've got zero worries about him...he is steadfast, an excellent husband and I'm positive he will be an excellent father

[mankie]

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
   

Originally posted by keithstg:
 If people have to keep their commitments, why would you forgive infidelities? [/b]

Because sexual urges are different from plotting and getting emotionally involved, and, because I wouldn't scrap my whole family structure just because a person was human and had a failing. If they decide, however, that they did not want to honor their commitment to the life we've built together as a whole, ie. work on the marriage, stay in the home as a father and husband, then, I don't see what is owed that individual. I would not be deciding to end his relationship with the children, HE would be deciding. You can't have it both ways (unless your bisexual and you disclose ahead of time) [/QB]

Suppose he left you to enter another loving relationship, and you went off whoreing yourself out for crack and smack...wouldn't he be able to provide the better home for the children and therefore take custody and maybe allow you to see them once in a while as long as you paid up every month?

[Celeste]

Originally posted by mankie:
  Suppose he left you to enter another loving relationship, and you went off whoreing yourself out for crack and smack...wouldn't he be able to provide the better home for the children and therefore take custody and maybe allow you to see them once in a while as long as you paid up every month?

well, now you are changing the scenario...I never said the woman should always get the kid...obviously in a situation like this, the most responsible, upstanding person should have custody...I might argue that the whoring crack smoker not necessarily be in the kids life...and I doubt they'd have money to contribute...you are offering an extreme situation...with an obvious answer

[mankie]

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
   

Originally posted by mankie:
  Suppose he left you to enter another loving relationship, and you went off whoreing yourself out for crack and smack...wouldn't he be able to provide the better home for the children and therefore take custody and maybe allow you to see them once in a while as long as you paid up every month?

well, now you are changing the scenario...I never said the woman should always get the kid...obviously in a situation like this, the most responsible, upstanding person should have custody...I might argue that the whoring crack smoker not necessarily be in the kids life...and I doubt they'd have money to contribute...you are offering an extreme situation...with an obvious answer [/b]

No YOU immediately assumed that the kid would be yours and YOU would allow him to see it if you so desired....YOU reacted the exact same way all women react because on this issue you are all arrogant/ignorant bitches.
 
 Suppose you were both equally fine parents...why should you get the kids?

[Celeste]

Originally posted by mankie:
   

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
     

Originally posted by mankie:
  Suppose he left you to enter another loving relationship, and you went off whoreing yourself out for crack and smack...wouldn't he be able to provide the better home for the children and therefore take custody and maybe allow you to see them once in a while as long as you paid up every month?

well, now you are changing the scenario...I never said the woman should always get the kid...obviously in a situation like this, the most responsible, upstanding person should have custody...I might argue that the whoring crack smoker not necessarily be in the kids life...and I doubt they'd have money to contribute...you are offering an extreme situation...with an obvious answer [/b]

No YOU immediately assumed that the kid would be yours and YOU would allow him to see it if you so desired....YOU reacted the exact same way all women react because on this issue you are all arrogant/ignorant bitches.
 
 Suppose you were both equally fine parents...why should you get the kids? [/b]

because the one leaving is the one breaching the family unit...you are such a misogynist...I am one of the least rabid female types and I don't really give a crap about "ownership" of a kid, but if some dude decides to split (unless the wife is abusive to him, on drugs or in some other way "bad" and doesn't want help or to work on it) then he's the one leaving...he is CHOOSING to leave...
 
 anyway, it's really up to the individuals or the courts to work out...and I don't reckon I'll ever have to worry about it

[mankie]

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
   

Originally posted by mankie:
     

Originally posted by Harriet Balls:
     

Originally posted by mankie:
  Suppose he left you to enter another loving relationship, and you went off whoreing yourself out for crack and smack...wouldn't he be able to provide the better home for the children and therefore take custody and maybe allow you to see them once in a while as long as you paid up every month?

well, now you are changing the scenario...I never said the woman should always get the kid...obviously in a situation like this, the most responsible, upstanding person should have custody...I might argue that the whoring crack smoker not necessarily be in the kids life...and I doubt they'd have money to contribute...you are offering an extreme situation...with an obvious answer [/b]

No YOU immediately assumed that the kid would be yours and YOU would allow him to see it if you so desired....YOU reacted the exact same way all women react because on this issue you are all arrogant/ignorant bitches.
 
 Suppose you were both equally fine parents...why should you get the kids? [/b]

because the one leaving is the one breaching the family unit...you are such a misogynist...I am one of the least rabid female types and I don't really give a crap about "ownership" of a kid, but if some dude decides to split (unless the wife is abusive to him, on drugs or in some other way "bad" and doesn't want help or to work on it) then he's the one leaving...he is CHOOSING to leave...
 
 anyway, it's really up to the individuals or the courts to work out...and I don't reckon I'll ever have to worry about it [/b]

If you left...would you take the child with you?
 
 And the courts don't "sort it out" they give the kid to the bitch!